Just Posted: Nikon D600 In-depth Review

We've just published our 23-page, in-depth review of the Nikon D600. Aimed at enthusiasts, the Nikon D600 offers a 24MP full-frame CMOS sensor and a 39-point AF system adapted from the D7000. In many other respects, it owes a lot to its considerably more expensive cousin, the 36MP D800. When we previewed the D600 we were impressed by its image quality and how many features it offers for the money. So how does it fare when put through our rigorous studio and real-world testing? Click the links below to find out.

On the other hand, the D800 is a good bet, but not as good as it should. Has a very good overall quality level, but a sensor with so many pixels, it wasn't the best idea they could get from the customer's point of view. Lost slightly on higher ISO for cheaper machines, and lost by having to reduce the number of images per second, far below the ideal. Process images so heavy has its price.Imagine this same machine with an excellent sensor of 24 Mpixel. It would be wonderful. I would say almost perfect.Yeah, so It took sales to a D4 without doubt, and all its higher range. This was one of the reasons to bet on this sensor, the other was throwing the eye to medium format.Still, a very serious product. I'd buy, but its high price and the disadvantages of so many pixels, no thank you.But the D800 is at the high level of the best on Nikon. Honestly, today in a ratio quality/products, I would say that in 12 products DSLR, Nikon has only 2 or 3 choices. But all at a very high price.

The D600 is clearly a lost bet, Nikon never will recover the investment made in this model.Low quality plastic, assembly at the level of a $600 model, inaccuracy in the use of the machine, all very amateurish despite their high price. The use of this D600 is not anything better than with a D7000. Yes, it has better image, but this is far from enough for the price. A disaster, although the idea of being able to access an FX sensor at lowest price to be good. But not in this way. Give up this, make a product that sells, this doesn't matter anymore.

Sensor residue Update Please.On review page 12 you wrote:"We can only speculate at this point as to the cause of the issue. What we can say is that simply blowing air did not remove all of the debris; a wet clean was required, suggesting that some contaminant may have found its way onto the sensor. We are of course, pursuing this issue with Nikon directly, and will update this review as more information comes to light.

The scoring really says nothing: you can only compare with other in the same category, but, D600 is the only one on its own category of "Mid range full frame" while Canon 5D MKIII is on "semi-pro full frame" category.

I can't understand this, they both should be on the same category, at least in my mind they both should share a "non-pro full frames" category so you have to score they both uniformly, and we can really compare.

DPReview is a fun read, but I have to take what they say with a grain of salt. I prefer to examine reviews from diverse outlets before coming to any conclusion. Even after I spend my hard-earned cash I understand that sooner than I would like, my beautiful-new camera will become obsolete. Thankfully, a great lens has some staying power.

My D600 has a data corrupted sensor. Vertical bands top to bottom on right side of image. all images... Since photo #1 (i just oddly never noticed it before).

Camera is sent back for warrenty.

I spoke with the nikon dealer guy, and he told me that he thinks Nikon is officially acknoledging the D600 dust/oil issue as of today.. which surprises me, and can't find anything online about this. ....... (due to the shutter gap thing suspected earlier) .

I feel so angry after all they have put me through - for those who have followed my story in these forums. I feel walked on.. ignored.. walked on some more... mean while they have my $2000...

You'd basically be crazy to buy one now. That said, I did have a very enjoyable day testing one, and came away thinking that the autofocus was the camera's only achilles heel in an otherwise extremely good value package. But with this sensor issue...... I wouldn't touch one for another six months at least.

I waited and waited for what I saw as a worthwhile (and affordable) replacement for my beloved D700... and I have finally found it. Been shooting with the D600 for over 2 months now... LOVE IT! At first I didnt think the extra resolution (12 megapixal VS 24 megapixal) was something that I really needed... but man-o-man was I WRONG! And this camera works even better in low light. Have recently shoot some 64,000 ISO images deep in a local forest with minimal noise... VERY HAPPY with those results as I couldn't accomplish that with my D700. Lenses I've recently used on it with amazing results are the 24-120 F4 Nanocoat ED-VR, 16-35 Nanocoat ED-VR and the 70-300 ED-VR. NO spotty sensor issue and I'm extremely happy with this purchase.

Good to hear your opinion and would love to see your iso 64,000 shots. Tried my 70-300 on a D800 recently and although I expected bad results because of all the "best lenses needed" blabla on the net, it turns out to give very good results even at 300mm (vr off) and matches the sharpness of the 70-200 at 200mm.

DPR is not bought by Nikon, why would they(DPR) report and track this oil spill knowing it will seriously hurt Nikon's sales. Look at their desparate give aways for you to buy D600, free Lowepro bag, a free 16g sd card, a free battery, an instant $100 rebate, a 2% rewards back, a 300$ epson rebate, a 20$ adobe element discount and a free shipping. Why not include two twinkies too.

Balico, are you sure that your shots with vr-off is clear. i know a guy who shoots weddings finds that the D800 is just to sensitive and able to pick small movements.his recommendation was use with vr or use tripod.

I bought mine 3 weeks after release and I'm pleased with the results using a 50mm 1.4. No dust, no oil. If you are worried about this possibility, buy from a place like B&H which stands behind their products.

For subjects up to 6' away, at 24 megapixels I see more in the photo than I do with the naked eye. There are a few ergonomic flaws in the camera (ISO control, grip, and thumb control) but overall this camera deserves to be called an instrument.

@VivaLasVegas. A buddy of mine recetly bought a brand new Corvette ZR1 that cost over 100K and 3 days later is went back to the dealer for electronic issues. My point being is that nothing is perfect even though we would like them to be and yes I understand that we pay alot of money for things that should not have problems but problems and issues are a part of life.

It seems there are a lot of little artificial downgrades in the firmware. Engineers actually had to spend time to EXCLUDE the features here and there, or replace them with lower-level features, and then test all that again. Triumph of marketing over reason.

I’m now about 1 month in using the D600 and can’t complain about the functionality it was designed to do, I don’t compare the D600 against my D4, D3X or my D800 and I don’t expect it to keep up to the speed of my D4. What I expect from the D600 is superb image quality which the D600 unquestionably delivers and if you get down to the nitty-gritty is a little better than the D3X which is now a old very expensive good camera and I wonder to myself what Nikon will replace it with. I invested in the D600 because I wanted to reduce the weight I’m carrying for 6 hours a day, my D4 with my 14-24 2.8 or 24-70 2.8 gets very weighty after 2 hours. The D600 took me a few days to get use to the smallness coming from the larger bodies I’ve since added the battery grip and it feels perfect. I use the D600 now mostly with my old 35-70 2.8D lens and it’s a mirage from heaven.

Ok I too had the dust issue and I cleaned my sensor by blowing it out with Dry Nitrogen don’t know what went wrong on production but it’s not an issue it’s just an inconvenience, I have not seen any oil but I’m sure if it needs addressing Nikon will take care of it. I wet clean my sensors about every 12 months because the sensors build up a fog or film on them after a while like the inside of your cars windscreen and when you drive into the sun the film magnifies the glare imagine what that would do to your images. In-between wet cleans I use an arctic butterfly with a blower bulb and it works just fine. It is a waste of time griping over dust because sooner or later you will get dust on your sensor just clean it and forget about all the small stuff and who is better than who and go outdoors and take some fantastic images.

Point Taken Have you taken your camera to a Nikon service center for cleaning?It sounds like you have a chamber with a lot of dust floating around, dust would be attracted statically back to the sensor. When cleaning the sensor firstly blow out the front chamber before you lock up the mirror to clean the sensor. Also before you start any cleaning could you turn off the sensor auto cleaning function in the menu and live it off for a couple of weeks then check to see if there is dust on the sensor. If you have no dust on the sensor turn the sensor auto cleaning back on and use the camera for a few days and then check for dust, if you find dust I think I know what's happening but let's hope I'm wrong. I gave my camera a really good blow out and I'm up to 4,500 shots and no dust has come back. I know it's upsetting especially on your new camera and it should not have happened. I am sure DPREVIEW knocked points off for the dust issue because the D600 should have scrod in the high 90's.

@Mark Perry: I'm sure we all do some sensor cleaning often. When going on a rare photographic trip it would be irresponsible not to. I mean, we all charge the batteries the night before, don' t we? And your comparison with the car windshield is very good.

But you miss the point: a camera just out of the factory ought not to feature this kind of problem. Leave that to the buyer after he swaps a few lenses under windy conditions.

The D600 has the same dust and oil issues, as the D7000 had.I bought a D7000, when it came out.I had it clean twice in less than one year. After the second clean up, about a 100 shots after, the oil started again. The camera had about 5000 shots.I sold it on EBay and bough a D300s. Very happy with my choice.5000 shots so far, no oil no dust. Never will buy a Nikon, not beforeAfter one year of production.

Incorrect. This is what people tell themselves to stop feeling bad after buying a dud product.Software for simple and unified systems pretty much never fail. Take a calculator for example.One could easily write code to convert Celsius to Fahrenheit, have it never fail, and it would be perfect software.I have a 35+ year old camera that still works perfectly as the day it was purchased. Is that enough time to be able to call a camera design perfect?

"To get FF at this price in this ergonomic body is a masterpiece of digital photography in the present technology life cycle."

The 5DMKII is available right now at a cheaper price than the D600.A second hand 5D comes in at a third of the price of a D600 and has just as much warranty as a D600 that the user has to keep cleaning the sensor on.

We have here an opto-mechatronics product using complex systems integrating mechanical work, sensors, actors, bus systems, embedded electronics and wiring with case and buttons. It is not a calculator.

I always had to clean my FF sensor when I used Canon Mark II products. I don't care because dust is there and cannot been eliminated at a 100% rate.

As one wrote in this forum, get out and make better pictures instead of counting dust particles.

My opinion is that this Nikon D600 is an excellent value/technology proposition, and I use many different brands.

Now that nikon gave us a cheap FF camera with outstanding image quality in a compact body, all the trolls and brand bashers chime in to speculate on the single annoying issue that the camera has shown. Just like they did on the D800 with the left AF issue, which was quickly adressed and solved by nikon. Good luck wasting your time, nikon will definitely solve this one just like they solved all of the others.

It could be a very annoying issue, Nikon has to monitor that. When the 5D Mark III was released it had problem with light getting into the sensor, and Canon reacted promptly. I hope Nikon will look into the dust sensor problem in the same way.

Totally agree with Nicolai. The D600 dust complaint (often from people who don't even own one and are just speculating) is the new Left AF Issue. When the D800 came out almost EVERY forum posts referenced the Left AF point (So ONE AF point out of 51 essentially ruined the D800 launch, even for people who didn't have any problems). In contrast, the Canon 5D3 had the light leak, but you didn't see months of 5D3 Light Leak posts destroying the 5D3 launch like the Nikon forum did for the D800.

All the AF points on my D800 work the same, but visiting the Nikon forum 2 months ago and you'd would think Nikon just released the biggest dog of a DSLR ever by the way people were carrying on. Now history is repeating itself. Early adopters almost always run into issues, but I guess some users like to rant and rave, some prefer to simply contact Nikon and get the matter resolved.

Marike6,5D3's light leak has been addressed by Canon and provided a fix. It will also.......via firmware update add a clean HDMI out video for 5D3. Canon also addressed via firmware update of f8 AF support and viewfinder AF pts light up for 1DX. Did Nikon address the green cast in D4, the left AF of D800 and the oil&dust in D600.....they have to address it first before fixing it. Nikon is a LEMONADE store.

As we all expected the Nikon D600 turns out to be a cracker - the dust problem seems commonplace with FF sensors, remember all the problems with the Canon 5D with dust on the sensor AND within the viewfinder? Sure Nikon will crack this problem. Roll on the Canon 6D - as a Canon user and fanboy I still think Nikon have got it right and Canon have spent all their efforts on GPS & Wi-Fi (thus getting it wrong) whilst most us users want a decent AF system, still, not long to go now.

@JavierDiaz: I do the same with the 5DIII since October 26: just read the manual & practice shots. AF: incredible, especially when compared with my 5DII. My kids are now available to FF action photos, and not just for my battle-tested 7D! Cheers! :)

Dust is a real issue only if you shoot with the MP-E 65 mm f/2.8 at 5X & f/8. But there is no Nikon MP-E 65 lens, just the Canon counterpart. Otherwise, a very nice review & a very nice camera overall from Nikon (I'm a Canon user and because of the Canon "gestalt" that I really enjoy it will be highly unlikely for me to change the system in the future; however, I think this D600 is a very good offer/package for the "first steps in the FF world"). Cheers! :)

I gotta disagree with you. The petition is not "useless" if anyone can sign it. There are those like me who are considering this camera who might be turned off by the oily sensor issue and want to be informed when the issue has been resolved.

To AshMills:A - do you own a D600 youself ?B - if you do, do you have sensor problems with it ?C - if you do, have you signed the petition ?D - if you do but haven't signed the petition, could you tell us why ?F - if you don't own a D600 nor want to buy one, could you tell us why you give an opinion about what others should do or not upon a problem that doesn't concern you ?

The K30 is an excellent APS-C camera for sure but the K-5 II is even better. Why did you choose to buy a K-30 which is two notches under the D600 instead of buying a camera that is just one notch under ?

Just shut up with the ricoh cameras allready. nobody cares. what lenses are you using on that camera, and how does it focus ? give us a break.

I work in low-light allmost constantly and I could do with nothing less than a D700 and fast lenses. I couldn't even imagine working with a crop Ricoh, because in low light usually STUFF MOVES and stabilisation becomes USELESS. You need good details in the higher ISO's and fast apertures in low light, so that you can freeze the action. good luck using that ricoh though.

Nikon dumbed down d600 for marketing reason..For AF yes it's not top of the class but it's fast and accurate..So if you say that D600 AF isn't good I bet u don't have it and maybe u even never held one.. U just read forums from someone that is incapable or got a lemon and then u are complaining..Just my 0.02

"And I want a rangefinder style FF camera with interchangeable lenses for everything else. Seriously, is that too much to ask?"

Yes, that is too much to ask...from Nikon, for a low price, that is. I'm sorry to tell you, but rangefinders are an old technology. It's like wanting to ride a horse on the highway. If you only want rangefinder style, but not a rangefinder, go with Fuji. If you want a small full-frame, then go with the RX1, or wait for a Sony full-frame NEX. A true full-frame rangefinder will not sell as well as a D600, so the price would obviously be more. It doesn't make any sense for Nikon to make such a thing. If you want to pay thousands of dollars more for poorer sensor quality, then go with Leica.

@intensity: Of course, manufacturers always know best. And you even more so.

When the D800 came out, how many voiced the same concerns I do about the megapixels and size of files. And as we can clearly see there is very little difference between the 24mp and 36mp in terms of resolution and image quality, but a huge difference in size.

And same goes for the 1series. The majority of people voiced my exact concerns.

The customers are there as evidenced by Fuji, Sony, and Olympus' success, but Nikon and Canon both cater to the unsuspecting and uncritical masses and fanboys like yourself. Keep kissing their proverbial ass.

I wouldn't say idiotic, it's just marketing. Cheaper camera off course will miss something and unfortunately AF makes perfect sense especially since Canon is not very competitive in this respect either.

it's a shame, because other than af area coverage the camera is just perfect. It's also the only real cons mention in the review.

A request: Please post a review on Canon 6D as soon as possible (i.e., when the camera is released to the market)!! Can't wait... :-)

It appears that D600 is a very well thought FF DSLR, and, at last, 'relatively' compact. The sensor dust is, however, a worrying issue (as a figure of speech, only K-5 'knows' the hell it went through with its stained sensor thriller).

I'd also like to add, after handling one, that the grip feels a little bit less substantial in volume (compared to the ideal 5D III's for instance) and, due to my somewhat long fingers, my hand felt -not much but nevertheless- cramped after a little while. Of course, this is subjective and depends on the size of one's hands.

Your wish might be granted as I'm guessing Canon will release the camera just in time for the holidays with reviews all over. I'm confident that it will have the same award as D600 here in DPR. Score will also be very similar around 1 to 2% more or less. I'm intrigue how DPR will approach it as the 6D seems inferior on paper while the D600 has dust problems.

That'd be great. According to published specs, 6D does appear to be superior on less points to D600 than what D600 is to 6D; however, 6D is, subjectively if you'd think, more compact, better designed, and with a more ergonomic grip. You've got to like a camera, after all it's an art tool, and, brand-bias aside (I really like quite a few film SLR Nikons), I can't relate neither to D600's design nor interface; the latter is a great FF camera but not for me.

dpreview - to release this review, with such a high score turning a blind eye to the sensor dirt issue, detracts from your credibility. No camera, regardless of "category" can be scored so highly while there remains such a significant, unresolved quality control issue. Period.

What can we expect next?? "The D900 is an awesome camera, and we found very little not to like. Yes, it has a large dangler hanging off the front, but we've let Nikon know how we feel about this by crikey, and if it weren't for this the camera would be capable of outstanding pictures. Platinum award, 99% (within its category of genitally enhanced full frame DSLRs aimed at the $60,000-62,000 income bracket)"

Not really...1. Dust is a very minor problem that only affects people shooting at very narrow apertures. And even then, you won't see spots unless there's a lot of blank space in the right area, and you know where to look. 2. The dust issue can be resolved with cleaning.3. I don't think the dust problem prevails after a certain number of shutter clicks.In reality, it's an extremely minor issue, and certainly can't be compared to "a large dangler hanging off the front." The dust issue won't stop anyone from making outstanding images.

The dust seems to be a problem in the first batches. But now I can see few people are saying they don't have such amount of dust problem (even in this page you can find such comment below). Does this mean Nikon has started resolving this problem internally?

Is the dust problem there in the recently bought (within last 1 or 2 weeks) cameras?

"Why is no one from Nikon speaking out ?"Excellent question and the answer is: japanese firms are used to be bad as hell to communicate with their customers, mostly when they have to deal with a problem they would prefer to hide under the carpet. That's a fact !

Great review as always but, dudes, you gotta lock it before you rock it.Your video of the old fellow playing the guitar was so tippy it was making me seasick, and the video of the taco truck looked like it was shot by someone's drunk dad. Tell your bosses that readers are demanding they approve the money for a serious tripod—fluid head preferably—and some sandbags to stabilize the whole thing. I assume you're trying to simulate what regular people would do, but these hi-rez cameras really amplify the most minute movements and it's getting hard to tell what is camera shake and what's a problem with the camera itself. Thanks for listening.

We think it is can be of benefit to show how a manufacturer's image stabilization performs in video mode, particularly on a camera priced at a point where users may be likely to grab video while out shooting stills handheld, as opposed to going out on a dedicated video shoot.

On the D800, which offers very similar video quality, we shot all but one of the video samples with tripods in addition to providing uncompressed video output. So hopefully there's something of more interest for you there.

Have D600 for 4 weeks now. No dirt on sensor. Very decent ergonomics and faster processing than D800e.Got this instead of a 800e because the 800e is not yet in middleformat territory, so I wait this out while having a lot of fun with the D600.

The body outperforms lenses. So far the 50mm-1.4G is the only one keeping up, barely.

800 and 600 perform almost the same. Both are not quite there yet. 800`s Expeed3 is a tad slow with the filesize So I wait it out tilll a "D900" with a fast "Expeed4" and 50mb pics starts to scratch on middle format. Usability/price - 600 wins.

I have just started taking up my hobby more seriously (photography of course), and I took some pictures with a 80-200 F2.8 push pull lens, which was pretty old, I got excellent pictures(at least I felt so) in the Indian GP (http://www.flickr.com/photos/89805324@N07/), I dont think average or less then average lenses would not be fit for the D600, after about 6000 actuation's, I definitely dont think so.

But yes the dust problem is very, very serious, and I'm returning my 2nd D600 because I cant live with it, unless Nikon comes out and accepts this issue, in assurance that purchasers of the first batch would at least have the issue fixed or get a body which is free from this.

50mm 1:1,4G is sharper stopped down a real world 2x. Roughly @15% of theoretical maximum. They all fall within max 5% of each other. Product variance and measurments errors would sort of call each other out (and at the same time might create a "superlensfreak")

Wide open all are 40% off the theoretical max. resolution.

There is a lot of development needed on the lens side. Bodies are already better than the lenses.

Right. Tell a landscape photographer than they can't shoot over f8 with this camera or else they get dust/oil in their shots.. This issue is what makes the camera defective from a QA perspective for me.

"for no logical reason that we can work out, the actual image area is smaller than those dimensions by about 5%, and the difference is made up with a black border around all four sides of the video image area."

In your face, "end user" :-)

Of course this is easily fixable in firmware (most likely by toggling a single bit) should some pressure from competitive products appeared in a few months time...

The reason that dpreview "can't work out" (of course they can) is called "product differentiation" and is perfectly logical, from the manufacturer's point of view. Manufacturer's point of view does not need to align with the customer's point of view - at least as long as the latter can't do much about it.

While there are indeed aspects of the D600's feature set that can be classified as 'product differentiation', enabling uncompressed video via HDMI and then limiting it to less than full frame output seems far more likely to be a bug.

A "bug"? Trust me, it took much more programming than doing the thing right in the first place. To illustrate, what takes more effort in Photoshop: displaying an image exactly as it is or downscaling it by an appropriate factor and adding a neat 5% black border around it?Since the result is aesthetically pleasing, it is very unlikely it happened by chance.

There's a rumor that Nikon is going to fix the Live View Aperture Bug. My guess is the HDMI output scaling issue will also be adressed shortly after. This camera is becoming quite popular with indie filmakers so Nikon has every incentive to fix it.

> AmadouThe theory the "feature" in question is a "bug" is dismissed by the fact in D800 firmware this is an option. Say again, you put an option in case the user after second thought prefers to use the buggy firmware?

So the D600 looks to have slightly less noise than the D800 sampled down to 24mp, although the D800 has better detail? This would seem to indicate, at least for high ISO shooting, the MP race has ran its course.

@Superka.....Stop being such a fan boi! Come on now...Ever new release has its problems...Ive been rooting for canon forever now....but they have just been simply following the pack for the last 4 years. no innovation at all. (same with nikon)

How is Canon AF the best? Nikon invented Predictive Focus Tracking algorithms that Canon only recently was able to copy. But I have to wonder how's the AF Tracking going to be good at all with only one cross-type AF sensor. You think Canon users complain about the 5D II's AF system, wait for the 6D.

Well, the dust/oil spots on the D600 sensor can be fixed.The whining of forum members I'm not so sure about.Seems the site is becoming the photographic equivalent of Jerry Springer reffing a US presidential election ;-)

If this is whining Anthony John, it costs $2000. Anyone with this problem shouldn't have to put up with poor quality production considering the purpose of the D600 is to take great photos.. and yet the photos themselves are seriously comprimised. It's not like a minor cosmetic thing like the colour of the camera body or something.

If it's a manufacturing issue, of course it will be fixed. It's not unusual for early adopters of any camera to run into issues, but most of the good vendors listen to customers and rectify such problems.

what about the D800 left side focus issue? That sounds to me like a firmware issue, and hopefully it will be fixed, but it's still pending. (not sure if Nikon has acknoledged that yet)

But in the case of the D600 sensor.. I really hope so!. I mean Nikon should at least say "yes we know of the issue, and we are looking into it" instead of aggrivating loyal customers who early adopted it by telling them it's "normal, live with it" .

I checked, and Nikon apparently (correctly me if i'm wrong) but has never done a camera recall - which is likely what would be required to correct this problem. So i'm really not sure if it will be fixed. I'm feeling doubtful.

Sandy B - are you refering to me? I didn't join DPREVIEW to complain at all. I'm a serious hobbiest ,and wouldnt' have bought the D600 (or other cameras) if i wasn't.

What i'm discussing is a REAL issue that people are experiencing that is causing a great camera to fail to operate the way it was sold to do. The fact that you can't take photos above f8 without dust and oil showing up in your photos is huge deal. think about it. Did you even buy the camera? I'm trying to stand up and support other people who are just as outraged as me.

Surely i want Nikon to auctally acknoledge this issue. I've contacted them a number of times as well about this. It's just not right. Otherwise what will happen? We will get very possibly ignored.

The best thing to do if you don't want Nikon to ignore you is start returning cameras that have this issue. Or at the very least send them in while it is still under warranty. Even if Nikon just sends it back and tells you it's normal they know it isn't and maybe if enough people send in or return D600s they will take notice and fix the issue.

Sandy B - sorry, i thought it was better, and it is a little better than when i first got it.. but the problem still persisted later.. This has been somewhat of an emotional roller coaster of expectation and hopes for me too.. (i'm a nikon fan) ..

I jumped the gun basically in my review.. I should update it. Cool that you actually looked into me though credability wise.

I still do have the dust issue, and it *may* (hopefully) still subside in due time..

I think i'm going to give my rant a rest though on these forums.. I wish everyone luck on this issue though.. I still don't think it's right from a Nikon QA perspective though. They should at least say they know of the issue and are looking into it intsead of aggrivating it's loyal customers by basically pretending it doesn't exist though.

I'm in direct contact with Nikon now, and if i hear back anything substantial i'll update you guys as well - for everyone dealing with this.. It is a show stopper type issue, esp for landscape photographers. It's just not acceptable for a product of this calibre.

it depends from your perception of the word 'good'it's definitely not a better camera (technically) than D800/800E, but for what it represents for that price maybe it's better camera 'thing' or value (or whatever you want) than D800 ,I thing dpreview stuff is pretty much tired justifying the scoring system :D after all it's a question of priority, if you are a milliner than D800 would have much better ranking for you than D600 IMHO

Lots of people share images all the time. But this is primarily a gear forum, not a photography forum, so the threads with actual photographs quickly get buried because nice real-world photos don't give the gearheads an opportunity to whine and complain.

Lot's of people share images on this site. There are weekly challenges that get tons of entries, different forums that focus on photography technique, and even gear forums have daily image posts pertinent to new cameras or lenses. Every user has a Gallery from which they can post images seeking C&C or start new threads featuring images from a new lens or body. And if that's not enough just click on a give user's Screen Name > Gallery.

But ultimately this is a Camera Review site with users all supporting their favorite brands but I know very few camera collectors on DPR. Not sure what the problem is.

I have no doubt that the future of DSLR will be the FX sensor, already know this for a few years. They say that the sensors are more expensive, so machines are. This is not entirely true. The evolution of sensors was this, to reach the largest, it was necessary to begin by small, it was necessary to develop technical and very much investment was made. This route is already done.Today we can abandon the DSLR APS-C and make a whole new range only on FX, with the same prices, with prices to suit all tastes. Let the APS-C sensors for compact cameras of all kinds, leaving the filth of 3, 4 or 5 mm sensor, stop producing it, or leave it to the phones. A D7000 with FX sensor (the D600) does not have to cost twice the price, this is a lie. Can this machine D600 be the beginning of a paradigm shift in the photographic industry? I hope so.

No offense, but the D600 is far from just a D7000 with an FX sensor. First of all it has a larger, more expensive prism . And aside from all the still photography improvements including weather sealing, class leading image quality from the new FX sensor, it is absolutely loaded with HDSLR video goodness: uncompressed HDMI out, headphone jack, audio levels, etc. Besides the D7000 is a superb, award winning camera to begin with, so the implication that an FX D7000 at this price is a rip-off is puzzling.

I'm not sure of your expertise in manufacturing, but I'm quite sure you have no idea what it costs to produce such a camera, and still make a profit.

OK, I want this camera, (I'm a current m43 shooter), but the future is NOT FX. Are you kidding? The future is teeny-tiny itty-biity compact camera and cell-phone sensors, which are probably used at least 100 to 1 over FX sensors.

Because the masses use cell-phone cameras doesn't mean professionals and amateur photographers will want them. The majority of pros and enthusiasts aren't going to suddenly adopt junky little cell-phone cameras instead of a proper camera just because some think everything needs to be miniaturized and dumbed down.

Just like years ago people said APS-C DSLRs would be the future, it will now be affordable FX cameras that take over. Hopefully.

I see. "The future" is what a small group of self-described experts (including you!) want, and not what most people use. That's the part I didn't get.

Personally, I pixel-peep too much, and I like the quality advantage that m43 gives me over compacts, but there is no doubt in my mind that my old Olympus C7070 compact (not to mention what the current group of enthusiast small-sensor compacts can do) was a much better system in and of itself than m43, and more than adequate to print at 8x10 as sharp as any DSLR on the planet, current models included.

C7070 advantages over m43--flash sync at all shutter speeds, greater DOF for macro and documentary without having to stop down, more compact, cheap underwater case--I could go on and on.

Agree to OP but I want to limit that. FX sensor is the future for Full Frame or crop lenses. These lens designs were originally for the 35mm format and there's no other way to maximize it than to attach a similar format. APSC or crop sensors was just invented as FF sensors was not feasible commercially. FF going mainstream, reminds me of the first DSLRs at $1000 prices. This is good times.

IMO DSLRs in the future will all be full frame, start at around $1200-$1500 and be exclusively marketed toward the pros/serious enthusiasts and the $500-$1000 price range will all be Mirror less ILCs marketed toward the consumers/soccer moms who just want something better than their P&S.

EVFs have a LONG LONG way to go before they will even come close to being able to replace OVFs, If they ever can.

I'm not sure I agree with you, since I shoot m43 mirrorless. I think that the advantage is to mirrorless viewfinders for everything except action photography, and even there it's close.

For example, I can magnify live view and manual focus on a subject's eyelash--perfectly--before taking the shot. There is no optical viewfinder in the world that even comes close to that.

Contrast detect autofocus is more accurate than phase detect, although a bit slower. Honestly, that difference may have disappeared as well. Olympus (I think) claims to have the fastest autofocus in the world on their mirrorless cameras.

The famed "view lockout" issue only happens if your camera is set to review pictures automatically.

Finally, EVFs more faithfully represent what you will photograph, because when you click the shutter you are not photographing what your eye sees, but what the camera's sensor sees.

I'm seriously considering FX (since the direct successor to my D300 isn't even on the horizon), but after reading these forums full of FF fanatics, I always ask myself "Do I want to be one of these people?" and arrive at a conclusion that I should stick with APS (and OVF). My D300 still performs well enough. (^~^;)

The positives of this machine are clear and true. And true are the negative aspects mentioned, many sweet and veiled form, for reasons that we all know but do not accept. The truth is that for this price point, "the least good" cannot be forgiven. And to get off the bar, and be forgiven at the level of the low-range segment, which represents a significant improvement over a D7000, the machine has a price value unforgivable. And when you start using, buying good objective becomes evident and more expensive is the initial investment.Thanks, but does not suit me. I can pay less for an APS-C faster and effective enough, or spend more to get the same on FX, and yes, with benefits in image quality. This middle ground, "hybrid", has no sense from an economic point of view. Is a bad investment. We spend a lot, but we have only one machine often slow and indecisive, with weak grip.

What are you taking about here, a D600 or a smartphone ? By the way, affordable or unaffordable is a question anyone has to ask according to his will/ability to pay, but forgiving ? Were you serious while writting this down ?

It is not a matter of having too much or too little money to buy, you can even take a match and burn your money. It is thinking about alternatives, to spend better what has to spend. Each decide for themselves what they do with what they have. A machine cannot be evaluated by the price only, or image that can produce under certain circumstances, has to be evaluated but by pictures that did not allow be lost, through their effectiveness and comfort in use. This is where this proposal misses, getting close to the machines of own brand at half the price, and very close to the price of other more expensive, but really best on almost everything.

I understand what you're saying but objectively, what's the alternatives for a full-frame camera at this level of price ? There are not a lot of choice, and even less if you think in term of international customer service that may lead you to choose a camera instead another one because the first one can be fixed in almost every countries while the other one (maybe a better one ?) is just garanteed in the country of purchase. On that ground, Nikon and Canon are unbeatable. And for the moment, no Canon full-frame to the D600 price on the market.

If sense is to be made from your rather opaque comments, even though you haven't used it, you don't like it. Apparently others, including DPR (who gave it the much coveted Gold Award) and DxOMark, who have both actually tested the camera, do.

I guess if they must use the silly percent, they could at least give the cameras sensible rankings. "82%" simply does not befit the D800 or 5D3. B minus? Really? What could possibly score higher? What does DPR know about sensor design such that they can authoritatively say Canon or Nikon could have done better? And on the other hand, presumably the Sony A99 will score lower, but would a 79% make any sense? I think a significant number of people are going to see this 87% and conclude the D600 is the best FF camera around.

I don't trust totally these "87% gold" for it is far below the 95% of pure platinum.

In fact, to avoid these never-ending discussions, maybe the system based on precious metal should be amended: platinum for pro cameras, gold for semi-pro/enthusiaste, silver for entry, and bronze for the rest. A suggestion...

And thanks Nikon for the D600. The D600 is so much better in every aspect than any other camera I have ever owned (~20 different Nikon bodies, for film and digital). Going from DX, I can fullly enjoy my old manual Nikkors again.

The image quality is astounding, and based on that quality alone this camera must surely be one of the greatest ever... I cannot really think of one with better IQ? the D800, for large prints, The Leica S2, at base ISO. A Hasselblad, perhaps?

But the most amazing thing is, this IQ comes in a camera which, finally, is down to the size I can happily hang over my shoulder when I go for a walk, just like with my old Nikon FA or F2.

Dust? Am I missing something here? I have 2000 exposures on my D600. I change lenses several times daily. I typically shoot at f2 to f8. Cleaned my sensor with a blower 1500 exposures ago. I have had dusty sensors before, often, know what it looks like, but my pictures are absolutely clean.

It may not happen to every camera. You could be fortunate although it sounds like you have minor dust.

I know dust is a normal problem with sensors, but in this case it's astronomically worse for some reason. I've owned the D90, the D7000 and never experienced this.

The way i test is I shoot at something like a blank white sheet of paper at ISO 100, f16. It doesn't matter if the shutter speed is slow , and i tend to shoot out of focus so not to mistaken something on the white paper as dust.

I've tried this same test on my D7000, which i've never cleaned and owned for 2 years. There was 2 smalll dust particles.

The D600 is brand new, and splattered. Even after i wet clean the sensor it comes back after a few photos.

To anyone acutally wanting to shoot over f8 this seems to be defective product in that it's not capable of taking photos over f8 without extensive cleaning every few photos.

fierlingd, I don't mean to sound like I don't understand your predicament. Obviously, you, like me, have bought the D600, spending a lot of money, and with high hopes and expectations.

Exploring the D600, I have certainly felt like a little boy at Christmas again (I am 60 so it's been a while). Wonderful thing is, I still feel the same thrill picking up this camera after 7 weeks!

Finding a problem like yours, I can fully understand your deep disappointment. But what I am saying is, I think you should send your D600 to Nikon for a check & clean, wait for it to come back, like new, only this time completely clean, mount a nice lens on to it and go out shooting.

Then check your pictures. You don't necessary have to check for dust (the blue sky, f22 maneouvre...) Don't try to clean the sensor. Just use your camera for a month or two. Enjoy your pictures.

It is indeed unusual for somebody to wet clean the sensor of a new camera (particularly so, since you have not had any dust problems before with your D7000 - this I find a little strange?)

I haven't seen what utensils or fluids you use for wet cleaning and know nothing about it. I do know, however, that when wet cleaning vinyl records many years ago, I managed to ruin a few of them. Impossible to listen to them, as they were full of grit.

I suggest you let Nikon do the Check & Clean.A blower brush is all I would ever use. Very rarely...

just to put things in perspective, I must have taken about 50,000 images with my 5D MK III and I have yet to clean the sensor, still spotless. Sensor cleaning feels like history to me. Note that I also have the bad habit of constantly changing lens, and I shoot mostly sports (the camera get shaken up a lot).

1. NO articulated Screen. I know the counter arguments, but for me its a fundamental issue. I can be far more creative with an articulated screen period. So someone is going to say: its too slow to focus on-screen, if that is the argument then I have to say: conceptual error, because I will be happy to even focus manually in that case (why no focus peaking?...)

If I get that DSLR then I will get the 24-70 2.8 Lens to go with it (no compromises), and its really overpriced for NOT having VR! If I am going to have to pay that kind of money then I want it all, no excuses please.

Whats the deal with the poor production quality? (Sensor-Dust, Oil)

Reconsider Sony A99? I am not a Sony-fan, but I get more for the money, especially in-body stabilization, articulated screen, focus peaking, higher frame rates, excellent EVF, etc

Obviously this isn't a camera for you. BUT there are workarounds to your complaints.

1. Buy an eternal HDMI display and shoot using the HDMI out mounting the display on a video rig.

2. Buy a third party 24-70 f/2.8 VR lens. Nobody NEEDS VR if they know how to handle a camera properly. The 24-70 is priced exactly right for its quality.

Maybe you should jump to Sony. The in-camera stabilization isn't nearly as effective as in-lens VR due to space restraints. The articulated screen is just a feature added for amateurs (IMO), focus peaking is just the new thing everyone wants to complain about not having, and I could go on and on.

It's apparent the things that you are looking for are available in another camera, so go for it.

I see no use in having an articulated screen. I barely see a reason to have a screen at all on anything above an entry level camera. You should be using the the viewfinder for 99% of your shots. The End.

and VR is rarely needed for a 24-70 2.8 Perhaps you should stick to your iPhone camera.

The ignorance from those that don't see benefits of things they clearly never used in the replies above me, is paramount.

Tripods can't go everywhere and are no full replacement for stabilization plus electronic first curtain plus no mirror slap, ever.

3 stops of stabilization (especially versus nothing) is nothing to sneeze at, regardless of where it's located, regardless of the photographer's capabilities and knowledge.

Maybe those that are stuck with dog slow LV can't see the benefits of a swiveling screen either, since a tripod seems to be almost a requirement in that case. Those with fast LV should know the benefits by now. It's as much of a "toy" as any other helpful feature on your (low or high end) camera of choice.

@stephan def run along and buy your Sony camera and the two (2) lenses available for that system. And then when Sony abandons that product line, like it does with everything it makes, you can be that hipster that uses something that no one else does!

no use for an articulated screen? Talk about having your head up your butt.

Earlier today i was walking, with my niece behind me, as she gleefully hugged her new skateboard. I spun the g12 around, loose framed some shots in back of me while still walking forward, and was able to take pics that you apparently would NEVER have gotten...unless you were walking backwards (and probably crash into someone :)).

You sound untrained in the realm of possibilities, friend. Open your heart.

As far as VR in the 24-70 f/2.8 goes it will be interesting to see what Nikon does when the make a new version of this lens. I would not be surprised to see it get VR. With the new Canon not having it while even Tamron does, Nikon adding it to their new 24-70 f/2.8 would put them in a very positive position vs Canon.

Starting October 1st, Getty Images will no longer accept images in which the models have been Photoshopped to "look thinner or larger." The change was made due to a French law that requires disclosure of such images.

A court ruling our of Newton, Massachusetts has set an important legal precedent for drone pilots: federal drone laws will now trump local drone regulations in situations where the two are in conflict.

macOS High Sierra came out today, but if you use a Wacom tablet you need to wait a few weeks before you upgrade. According to Wacom, they won't have a compatible driver ready for you until "late October."

Vitec, the company that owns popular accessory maker Manfrotto, has just acquired JOBY and Lowepro for a cool $10.3 million in cash. The acquisition adds JOBY and Lowepro to Vitec's already sizable collection of camera gear brands.

A veteran photojournalist, Rick Wilking secured a spot in the path of totality for the August solar eclipse. While things didn't quite pan out as predicted, an unexpected subject in the sky and a quick reaction made for a once-in-a-lifetime shot.